Wednesday, July 9, 2014

Subtle Church Abuse: The Ambush

 

The Ambush:

Church members who are unhappy with the performance, personality or mannerisms of a minister begin talking quietly among themselves and gaining supporters who are also unhappy. Rather than approaching the minister with the complaints (which eventually turn into allegations) as is advised in Matthew 18:15-17, the group lies in wait in a state of anonymity until they carry out a surprise attack.

…that’s how I described The Ambush in my last post. I also mentioned the events leading up to The Ambush in a previous post called People Are Concerned.


Here are the questions that plague me about The Ambush:

1. How do we reconcile the words of Matthew 18:15-17 with our actions when we neglect to go to another person, “just the two of you”, with our concerns/complaints? Does the Bible even give us a justification for taking our concerns/complaints to another person? Or are we only to concern ourselves with confronting a brother or sister about an actual sin as the verse references? What distinguishes a sin from an annoyance or difference of opinion? If we presented our concerns “just the two of us”, would the problem end there? Would we be able to reconcile with each other without further action?

What is the responsibility of those in leadership? If approached by a church member with a concern, should those in leadership hear the concern at once or ask the member if he has taken his concern to the person he has a complaint about? What if the member hasn’t spoken to the person he has a problem with? What if he refuses to go “just the two of us” to that person? What if the member with the complaint is a “significant giver” who threatens (either directly or by implication) to withhold his offering if leadership refuses to take action based on his concern?

“If a fellow believer hurts you, go and tell him—work it out between the two of you. If he listens, you’ve made a friend. If he won’t listen, take one or two others along so that the presence of witnesses will keep things honest, and try again. If he still won’t listen, tell the church. If he won’t listen to the church, you’ll have to start over from scratch, confront him with the need for repentance, and offer again God’s forgiving love.” Matthew 18:15-17 (MSG)


2. What if the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) at your church states (as mine did):

“Church members may present any grievance of a personnel nature in writing to the Pastor or to members of the Personnel Committee or they may personally present their grievance at a meeting of the committee.”

 

        griev·ance

: a feeling of having been treated unfairly

: a reason for complaining or being unhappy with a situation

: a statement in which you say you are unhappy or not satisfied with something

What happens when your SOP lacks a scriptural foundation and condones members simply presenting their grievances to a committee without first going to the person they have a grievance with? Is a grievance always a sin? Or is a grievance sometimes simply, as the definition states, something you are unhappy about or dissatisfied with? Does the SOP trump scripture? Do we have a responsibility to recognize inconsistencies between our church policies and Biblical principles? Are we somehow excused from the consequences of our actions if we can claim that we were following church policy (even though it violated scripture)?

Some of the grievances against the FBC ministers who were forced to resign that I’ve heard from members over the last 2 years appear to be nothing more than annoyances or differences of opinion:

“He didn’t shake [a deacon’s] hand and scowled at him in the hallway before worship service.”

“He is too happy when he leads music. It’s not believable.”

“He waves (flaps) his arms around too much when he leads music.”

“The college students are leaving because the college minister isn’t doing a good job.”

“A minister should look presentable when he’s on the stage. He needs to iron his pants.”

“He’s not friendly.”

“He’s too sarcastic.”

“He’s abrasive.”

“He’s so  unorganized. It drives me crazy.”

One legitimate-sounding accusation still circulating in town is that of insubordination. The congregation took pause when these accusations were read by a deacon in a business meeting (after 2 of the ministers had “resigned” under pressure). However, the ministers were not given a chance to confront the accusations and the accusations were not proven with evidence of wrongdoing. In fact, when the accused ministers or worried church members questioned the legitimacy of the accusations, those in leadership responded with silence and claims of being bound by their duty to keep facts confidential.

Many times over the last 2 years, I’ve allowed myself to imagine that the legitimate-sounding claims were true…those of insubordination (refusing to cooperate with the pastor’s leadership)…and that they could be proven without a doubt. Then what? Would the secret forced resignations be warranted? Would the church’s refusal to allow the ministers the chance to seek forgiveness and reconciliation be legitimate? Could the church’s treatment of the ministers’ families be considered Biblical? Could the actions by leadership be justified?  I don’t believe so.


In my experience, the ambush looked like this:

Certain members of church leadership and a few church members decided they wanted 3 ministers removed from the church.

The individuals never confronted the ministers with their “grievances”, but carefully crafted a case against them from the shadows using information gained from those who were unhappy.

The ministers were rendered defenseless by the secrecy used by those individuals as they planned and carried out their ambush. The ambush was orchestrated by a small group of influential members, but carried out by an official church committee.

The accusations remain secret or vague…and unchallengeable because of the extraordinary effort by those in leadership to remain silent and present a façade of unity to the community.

I’m left wondering where in the Bible we find Jesus suggesting that we, as Christians in our “churches”, operate secretly as we plan to ambush a fellow Christian?

012

No comments:

Post a Comment